Bush Says He Has a Big Second-Term Agenda

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Sad Story

WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Monday he has "a big agenda in mind" for his second term that begins this week and that four years is going to be a short time to meet all his goals.

"We got to get moving and get some things done before ? before people kind of write me off," Bush told CBS News in an interview.

He said he hopes that with his final election behind him, Republicans and Democrats in Congress will work together to pass his legislation. Unity will be the most important theme of his inaugural address on Thursday, he said.

"By uniting we can get a lot done in terms of securing the peace in the long-term for our citizens and getting a lot done to make sure our citizens have got choices in life and more opportunities in America," Bush said in the taped interview.

He said he'll announce his "big agenda" at the State of the Union address in two weeks, but it will reflect his campaign promises. Those include overehauling Social Security (news - web sites) and the legal liability system; improving the tax code, school standards and the budget process; and making health care accessible to more Americans.

Besides Bush's swearing in on Thursday, the inaugural week festivities include a salute to America's military and several lavish balls. Bush said he doesn't think it's excessive despite the war and last month's devastating tsunami, although he told CBS, "I've never been much of a dancer, and the idea of going to 11 balls might be viewed as excessive."

Bush said it's important to celebrate a "peaceful transfer of power" and that he suspects inauguration guests have been generous in donating to tsunami victims. "You can be equally concerned about our troops in Iraq (news - web sites) and those who suffered at the tsunamis with celebrating democracy," he said.

The president opened his inaugural week Monday with a salute to one of his most recognizable departing Cabinet members and the late Martin Luther King Jr. on a holiday dedicated to the civil rights leader.

Bush presented outgoing Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) and his wife, Alma, with the John Thompson Legacy of a Dream Award during an afternoon ceremony at the Kennedy Center, calling Powell "one of the most effective and admired diplomats in America's history."

"More than four years ago when I needed a secretary of state, I knew what I was looking for," the president said. "I wanted someone who believed deeply in the values of our country and could share them with the world, a person of wisdom and decency, a leader who could bring out the best in people. I found all this and more in Colin Powell."

Powell was often seen as out of step ideologically with other senior officials in Bush's administration but has remained the most popular administration official in poll after poll. He announced his resignation after Bush was re-elected and the president nominated national security adviser Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites) to take his place.

As a Republican, and a Christian, and as I resident of the South, even I can ask, "why doesn't he just go back to the ranch and leave everyone else alone?" I was hoping for more silent 2nd term, no more invasions, finish up Iraq, find bin Laden. I did my job, I didn't vote for this guy, either time. Who nominated Kerry? Let's blame them!!
 

wylecoyote

Member
Nov 14, 2004
141
0
0
Interesting article... a little scary, as you say.

I'm sorry about your sig too... as a liberal, atheist, and resident of the norht, I welcome your views, even if I disagree with them.
 

Tommunist

Golden Member
Dec 1, 2004
1,544
0
0
Originally posted by: wylecoyote
Interesting article... a little scary, as you say.

I'm sorry about your sig too... as a liberal, atheist, and resident of the norht, I welcome your views, even if I disagree with them.


Yeah man - don't let the negative response to the scary extreme right-wing people affect your ability to express your (hopefully) more reasonable conservative views.
 

Tommunist

Golden Member
Dec 1, 2004
1,544
0
0
I like how Powell was the most "out of step" with the admin but was the most popular of them all. I think that' fairly telling and gives me hope...
 

brokendolly

Banned
Jan 18, 2005
112
0
0
Originally posted by: bamacre

Bush presented outgoing Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) and his wife, Alma, with the John Thompson Legacy of a Dream Award during an afternoon ceremony at the Kennedy Center, calling Powell "one of the most effective and admired diplomats in America's history."


Why because he lied and covered his ass?

About MLK-
Bush speaks about his LOVE of MLK's portrait
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Iran is next, right?

God, I hope not. :(
Looks to be the case, though. And the scariest thing is these ideologues truly think the average Muslim in the Middle East *wants* the US to intervene.
 

miketheidiot

Lifer
Sep 3, 2004
11,060
1
0
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Iran is next, right?

God, I hope not. :(
Looks to be the case, though. And the scariest thing is these ideologues truly think the average Muslim in the Middle East *wants* the US to intervene.
Hopefully china, india, or pakistan will intervene and give the idiots second thoughts, but i doubt it would help. The next 4 years are going to be an ugly 4 years.
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Iran is next, right?

God, I hope not. :(
Looks to be the case, though. And the scariest thing is these ideologues truly think the average Muslim in the Middle East *wants* the US to intervene.

Hmmm,
the draft thing comes to mind again. I mean reservists are already suing the gov't because they are overexending their stay. Having two different fronts would be very difficult to handle, especially since there is no reason to believe that Iran would turn out any different from iraq (guerilla warfare).
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: halik
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Iran is next, right?

God, I hope not. :(
Looks to be the case, though. And the scariest thing is these ideologues truly think the average Muslim in the Middle East *wants* the US to intervene.
Hmmm,
the draft thing comes to mind again. I mean reservists are already suing the gov't because they are overexending their stay. Having two different fronts would be very difficult to handle, especially since there is no reason to believe that Iran would turn out any different from iraq (guerilla warfare).
That's what my ex's dad was saying (re: the draft). He's ex-Navy. Was assigned to the USS Manchester during the Korean War.

He thinks Bush is insane and is hell-bent on sending our kids to die to meet some fantasy of his.
 

lozina

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
11,711
8
81
Originally posted by: halik
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Iran is next, right?

God, I hope not. :(
Looks to be the case, though. And the scariest thing is these ideologues truly think the average Muslim in the Middle East *wants* the US to intervene.

Hmmm,
the draft thing comes to mind again. I mean reservists are already suing the gov't because they are overexending their stay. Having two different fronts would be very difficult to handle, especially since there is no reason to believe that Iran would turn out any different from iraq (guerilla warfare).

Why would we need a draft? There ought to be plenty of able bodied men and women to die in Iran for Bush's master plan- Just over 50% of active voters to be more specific.
 

irwincur

Golden Member
Jul 8, 2002
1,899
0
0
So tell me...

What is wrong with fixing a broken socialist welfare program? What is wrong with limiting the power of attorneys? What is wrong with a simple tax code?

I don't see where these are BAD issues. The way I see it is that they have needed work for a long time. It's about time someone has the balls to actually do something about them.
 

Darkhawk28

Diamond Member
Dec 22, 2000
6,759
0
0
Originally posted by: irwincur
So tell me...

What is wrong with fixing a broken socialist welfare program? What is wrong with limiting the power of attorneys? What is wrong with a simple tax code?

I don't see where these are BAD issues. The way I see it is that they have needed work for a long time. It's about time someone has the balls to actually do something about them.

Socialist welfare program? Are you referring to SS? If you are, you are typically uninformed.

Attorney's are the consumers only protection. Tort reform can be done without liability limits.
 
Jul 1, 2000
10,274
2
0
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Iran is next, right?

God, I hope not. :(
Looks to be the case, though. And the scariest thing is these ideologues truly think the average Muslim in the Middle East *wants* the US to intervene.
Hopefully china, india, or pakistan will intervene and give the idiots second thoughts, but i doubt it would help. The next 4 years are going to be an ugly 4 years.

"Intervention" by China or India is the last thing I think you should wish for.

Intervention, in its most benign form, means diplomatic pressure. No big deal. This administration has ignored that before.

In other forms, intervention could mean supplying sophisticated weapons systems and even troops to kill our guys. This potentially could erupt into a regional conflagration that could claim millions of lives.

That puts our troops in extreme danger, and I don't think you should ever wish for that.

The ideal situation would be for Iran to fall quickly. Please don't wish for escalation of conflict.
 
Jul 1, 2000
10,274
2
0
Originally posted by: irwincur
So tell me...

What is wrong with fixing a broken socialist welfare program? What is wrong with limiting the power of attorneys? What is wrong with a simple tax code?

I don't see where these are BAD issues. The way I see it is that they have needed work for a long time. It's about time someone has the balls to actually do something about them.

Ok - speaking as a fairly conservative person...

There is something wrong with "fixing" a "broken" socialist welfare program that millions of elderly Americans depend on for daily subsistense. They were told that SS would always be there for them. It should be there for them. No ifs, ands, or buts. There is something wrong with deliberately provoking a war with Iran, if you don't have money to care for your seniors. Admittedly, there are seniors (like Ross Perot) who probably should not receive SS. Reform SS there... but don't overhaul it.

There is something wrong with limiting the power of attorneys, in that the "power" that you seek to limit is the fundamental right of a citizen to receive compensation for being injured. I'm not a personal injury attorney, but I can tell you from first-hand experience that tort reform is bad news. There are already laws on the books to deal with the abuses that tort reform seeks to address (Sanctions for filing frivolous lawsuits, and the like). Tort reform is a scheme, bankrolled by big insurance, to limit damages - not to eliminate frivolous lawsuits.

There is nothing wrong with simplifying the tax code. Maybe under a simpler tax code the rich will actually pay taxes.

 

lozina

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
11,711
8
81
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Iran is next, right?

God, I hope not. :(
Looks to be the case, though. And the scariest thing is these ideologues truly think the average Muslim in the Middle East *wants* the US to intervene.
Hopefully china, india, or pakistan will intervene and give the idiots second thoughts, but i doubt it would help. The next 4 years are going to be an ugly 4 years.

"Intervention" by China or India is the last thing I think you should wish for.

Intervention, in its most benign form, means diplomatic pressure. No big deal. This administration has ignored that before.

In other forms, intervention could mean supplying sophisticated weapons systems and even troops to kill our guys. This potentially could erupt into a regional conflagration that could claim millions of lives.

That puts our troops in extreme danger, and I don't think you should ever wish for that.

The ideal situation would be for Iran to fall quickly. Please don't wish for escalation of conflict.

Well, if you google "china iran deal" you'll find the reason why china will likely not sit idly by while america invades iran.

edit: also

see this

i doubt the neocons are dumb enough to do anything like invade Iran now, unless of course they make some huge concessions to china.... they will probably have to resort to invading syria instead.
 
Jul 1, 2000
10,274
2
0
Originally posted by: lozina
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Iran is next, right?

God, I hope not. :(
Looks to be the case, though. And the scariest thing is these ideologues truly think the average Muslim in the Middle East *wants* the US to intervene.
Hopefully china, india, or pakistan will intervene and give the idiots second thoughts, but i doubt it would help. The next 4 years are going to be an ugly 4 years.

"Intervention" by China or India is the last thing I think you should wish for.

Intervention, in its most benign form, means diplomatic pressure. No big deal. This administration has ignored that before.

In other forms, intervention could mean supplying sophisticated weapons systems and even troops to kill our guys. This potentially could erupt into a regional conflagration that could claim millions of lives.

That puts our troops in extreme danger, and I don't think you should ever wish for that.

The ideal situation would be for Iran to fall quickly. Please don't wish for escalation of conflict.

Well, if you google "china iran deal" you'll find the reason why china will likely not sit idly by while america invades iran.

edit: also

see this

There is always the hope, infintesimally small though it may be.